Pakistan - U.S. "War on Terror" Alliance Falling Apart

by Mushahid Hussain

His previous visits, in November 2001 and February 2002, took place in a more conducive environment, when the "honeymoon" between President George W. Bush and Musharraf under the rubric of a common use for terrorism had just begun.

That "romance" is now more of a flickering flame than the passionate embrace that Pakistani policymakers earlier presumed.

As in previous occasions, Musharraf is among a handful of foreign leaders scheduled to hold a personal meeting with Bush. This time, however, the two sides have different agendas.

The American priority is to prosecute the war on Iraq after the successful 'regime change' in Afghanistan, where Pakistan's role was crucial.

Then Musharraf's arrival in the United States was heralded by two public expositions of U.S. concerns: one, an official statement criticizing the military government in Islamabad and the other, reports that al-Qaeda presence is growing in Pakistan.

On the eve of his arrival in the United States, Musharraf received a slight slap on the wrist in the strongest worded yet statement regarding democracy in the context of Pakistan's upcoming elections.

On Sept. 7, Bush's national security adviser, Condoleeza Rice, said: "We made clear to Gen. Musharraf that we objected to some of the moves he made recently."

She was referring to the 29 arbitrary amendments to Pakistan's Constitution that Musharraf decreed last month. "The President (Bush) has raised with Musharraf our expectations for elections in October -- and there isn't any compromise in terms of democratic principles," Rice said.

The other American concern was voiced in a New York Times story three days later, which cited U.S. "intelligence officials" saying that "the world's largest concentrations of Qaeda operatives are now in Afghanistan and Pakistan -- and Qaeda operatives who found refuge in Pakistan are starting to regroup and move back into Afghanistan."

"The recent influx into Afghanistan is creating new dangers," the story added. Implicit in this account is an allegation that despite its best efforts to seal off the 2,254 kilometer border with Afghanistan, Pakistan's armed forces have failed to foil al-Qaeda's efforts to regroup and return.

Musharraf retorted to this oblique criticism with his own critique on Iraq and Afghanistan.

He appealed to the U.S. administration to develop a "consensus in the Muslim world" on plans to attack Iraq, since this would "inflame Islamic extremism." He added: "We would not like to be involved in this (attacking Iraq)."

And in an obvious reference to American operations in Afghanistan, Musharraf said: "The situation is still not in control."

Actions need to be taken on which "we have certain views of our own to extend the writ of the government on the whole of Afghanistan," implying an American failure to do so in the 10 months since the Taliban's ouster in November.

These recent speeches and statements from the United States and Pakistan reflect their respective concerns, of which two are noteworthy.

After meeting his Indian counterpart Monday, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said: "We spoke to the Pakistanis about not interfering in any way with the Kashmir elections, which we expect to be free and fair and will be an opportunity for people to see that these elections are being held in a free and fair manner."

These elections, which being held by India in its part of Kashmir, start polling in the first phase on Sept. 16 and end on Oct. 8.

In his Sept. 12 speech to the UN General Assembly, Musharraf condemned those elections as a "rigged" process and a "sham," refusing to accord them the legitimacy that Powell did.

Similarly, while Musharraf expressed concern about the threat of war with India and South Asia still being a flashpoint, the American view of the situation is apparently not the same.

At the UN General Assembly, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan referred to four flashpoints in a descending order of priority: Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan and South Asia.

Bush, for his part, made an Iraq-centric speech, referring to Palestine and Afghanistan in passing but ignoring the "threat to peace" in South Asia that Annan had cited.

This is a far cry from the situation 90 days earlier, when South Asia was supposed to be the premier flashpoint and close to a potential nuclear conflict.

The India factor has also come to play a role as a competitor for American attention. In his UN speech, Musharraf called this an attempt by New Delhi to "drive a wedge between Pakistan and its coalition partners."

Indian Foreign Minister Yashwant Sinha attacked the Oct. 10 Pakistan elections as a "sham election," urging the United States to take notice of it.

In New York, India's Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee pointedly referred to the role of "democracies" joining hands to combat terrorism, excluding Pakistan since it is run by a military government.

Pakistan had sought to draw the United States into mediating on Kashmir, something Washington did during the last two crises, in January and June 2002.

Musharraf alluded to this by saying that "crisis management must not be allowed to become a substitute for conflict resolution." But this is unlikely to happen on Kashmir, given the Americans' current obsession with Iraq -- one that could even make Afghanistan a sideshow.

With elections in Kashmir and Pakistan in the offing, an unfinished war in Afghanistan that may cross over into Pakistan and the coming conflict with Iraq, major breakthroughs in the Pakistan-American relations are unlikely.

Right now, their priorities are different -- maybe even divergent -- on Iraq, Kashmir and al-Qaeda.

While seeking "regime change" in Iraq, the United States seems eager to stick to the status quo in South Asia, something contrary to Pakistan's perspective, particularly on Kashmir.